>Of course, there are always wish list items, but why do you say ISPF out
>of the bag isn't very productive?
Actually, I have the same question.
I have used ISPF since it was only one piece and called SPF.
It is very productive, even in vanilla.
But, you have to proficient in it.
If you've never seen it before, it doesn't matter what it does.
Yes, vanilla ISPF is way more productive than what came before it, but it is
not as productive as it could be, which is the point I am trying to make.
And I speak as an avid ISPF dialog developer, not as a casual user.
I once believed that ISPF pretty much represented the apex of programmer
productivity. The editor is absolutely brilliant, and is, IMO, the gold
standard for programmers' editors. So are the dialog services provided for
developers who create their own ISPF applications.
My complaint is in regards to how the ISPF user interface works; the way the
panels are organized, the way that functionality is fragmented etc.
I've been fortunate enough to have extensive exposure to two different
mainframe products, both of which are, IMO, far superior to using regular
ISPF panels. One is Spiffy, and the other is SimpList. Having used them
both, I absolutely couldn't imagine going back to using regular ISPF panels.
To me, it would be like taking a huge step backwards. Anyone who uses
regular ISPF has my extreme sympathy; they're doing themselves a great
injustice and have
absolutely no idea how much time or effort they're wasting.
So, if you've never seen SimpList or Spiffy before, check them out and see
for yourself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
